查詢結果分析
相關文獻
- Comparison of Transrectal Ultrasonography, Digital Rectal Examination and Prostate Specific Antigen in the Detection of Prostate Cancer
- 比較肛診、前列腺特殊抗原及經直腸前列腺超音波在偵測前列腺癌之效益
- Morbidity with Contemporary Transrectal Biopsy of the Prostate
- 臺灣地區之前列腺癌
- The Role of Percent Free-Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA) in Patients with Total PSA Levels between 4.0 and 10.0 ng/ml
- Prostatic Carcinoma with Brain Metastasis Presenting as a Tumor Hemorrhage
- 前列腺癌腫瘤標記(PSA)最新應用及發展
- 罹患前列腺癌的危險因子--類胰島素生長因子I(IGF-I)
- Rectal Stenosis: An Unusual Presentation of Prostate Adenocarcinoma
- 前列腺癌
頁籤選單縮合
題 名 | Comparison of Transrectal Ultrasonography, Digital Rectal Examination and Prostate Specific Antigen in the Detection of Prostate Cancer=比較經直腸前列腺超音波,肛診及前列腺特殊抗原應用於前列腺癌之診斷 |
---|---|
作 者 | 江博暉; 渡邊泱; | 書刊名 | 中華民國泌尿科醫學會雜誌 |
卷 期 | 8:1 1997.03[民86.03] |
頁 次 | 頁14-21 |
分類號 | 416.275 |
關鍵詞 | 經直腸前列腺超音波; 前列腺癌; 前列腺特殊抗原; Transrectal ultrasonography; Prostate cancer; Prostate specific antigen; |
語 文 | 英文(English) |
中文摘要 | 肛診,經直腸前列腺超音波及前列腺特殊抗原目前已廣泛地被應用於前列腺癌的 診斷。在本研究中我們欲比較其中之差別並定出臨床診斷前列腺癌實際應用流程。在本研究 中共有接受前列腺切片的病患 353 位列入分析。 而診斷流程是以切片結果的陽性預測值來 決定。當三種診斷工具中的二種是正常時,診斷出前列腺癌的機會相當小。反之,如其中二 種為異常時,則癌症的可能性很高。肛診及前列腺特殊抗原是結合兩種診斷工具中最好的一 種組合。系統性切片比單獨針對異常部位切片可造成幾乎兩倍的陽性率。如肛診及前列腺特 殊抗原正常的話,具有臨床上重要性的前列腺癌幾乎不存在。反之,肛診及前列腺特殊抗原 異常,則前列腺癌的可能性很高,病人必須接受系統性的切片。如其中一種檢查正常而另一 種異常時,則經直腸超音波可作為第二線的篩選工具,來決定病人是否需作切片。如依我們 提出的診斷流程來決定是否需切片檢查,則必須接受切片檢查的病人數會減少很多,但癌症 的診斷率卻是相同。 |
英文摘要 | Digital rectal examination (DRE), transrectal ultrasonography (TRUS) and prostate specific antigen (PSA) are currently widely used in the detection of prostate cancer. In this study, we try to compare these methods and delineate the algorithm for the detection of prostate cancer in the urological practice. Prostate specific antigen values were determined with DAINABOT assay. Transrectal ultrasonography was performed with an Aloka Model 520. Totally 353 patients receiving prostate biopsy were included in the study. The algorithm was determined by positive predictive value that was calculated from the biopsy data. When two of three diagnostic modalities were normal, the probabilities of detecting cancer were almost negligible. If both of these diagnostic methods were abnormal, it was possible to predict cancer with a higher probability. The combination of DRE and PSA is the best of these two combinations. Systematic biopsy resulted in a nearly two times' detection rate than directed biopsy. The combination of normal DRE and PSA value excluded the presence of clinically significant prostate cancer. Conversely, if both DRE and PSA are abnormal, the probability of prostate cancer is very high. Systematic biopsies should be performed. For other conditions TRUS could be served as a second line screening method to gain the same cancer detection rate but fewer biopsies needed. |
本系統中英文摘要資訊取自各篇刊載內容。